Hulk Hogan, hurricanes and a blockbuster recording: A week in review of the Trump hush money trial
WASHINGTON — Key witnesses took the stand in the second week of testimony in Donald Trump’s hush money trial, including a California lawyer who negotiated deals at the heart of the case and a longtime adviser to the former president.
Jurors heard a potentially crucial piece of evidence — a 2016 recording of Trump discussing a plan to buy the silence of a Playboy model — as well as testimony about the wrestler Hulk Hogan and hurricanes, literally and figuratively.
Outside the jury’s presence, Trump was fined for violating a judge’s gag order. Additional sanctions could await the presumptive Republican nominee for president.
An overview of some highlights of the past week:
Hope Hicks, a onetime Trump confidant who was central to his job for years, detailed a seminal moment of the 2016 campaign: The Washington Post’s revelation of a 2005 “Access Hollywood” recording in which Trump bragged about grabbing of women’s genitals without their consent. .
Hicks acknowledged that he was “concerned, very concerned” when a reporter asked her for comment before he broke the story.
“I had a good feeling that this was going to be a huge story and that it was going to dominate the news cycle for the next few days,” Hicks testified. “This was a damaging development.”
The recording, which was made public just days before a debate with Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, is relevant to the case because prosecutors believe it helps explain the frantic efforts by Trump and his allies in the remaining weeks of the campaign to prevent any additional damaging suppress stories that might arise. .
In the wake of the tape’s release, Hicks said she asked Michael Cohen, Trump’s then-lawyer and personal fixer, to track down a rumor about another potentially damaging recording. “There wasn’t that kind of bond anyway,” said Hicks, “but he kind of sought that out for me.”
Regardless, the immediate impact of the “Access Hollywood” story was so intense, Hicks recalled, that it distracted from a real storm. Hurricane Matthew dominated the news cycle when Hicks was contacted about the upcoming story. That didn’t last long.
“The ‘Access Hollywood’ Tape Pushed the Hurricane Out of the News?” asked prosecutor Matthew Colangelo.
“Yes,” Hicks replied.
Trump may be a criminal defendant, but an element of his defense came into focus last week when one of his lawyers suggested that Trump might have been a victim.
Defense attorney Emil Bove suggested during a remarkably tense cross-examination that his client was effectively targeted for extortion by Keith Davidson, a crucial witness and the lawyer who negotiated hush-money deals for two women, porn actor Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal. having had sexual encounters with Trump. Trump denies it.
Bove named a group of celebrities who he suggested had been forced over the years to pay Davidson’s clients eye-watering sums to suppress damaging videos or stories. Among them was actor Charlie Sheen, from whom Bove said Davidson had “withdrawn sums of money”; Davidson took issue with the word “extract” but said he had been involved in “valid settlements” with Sheen.
Davidson also acknowledges that he faced an FBI investigation but was never charged for allegedly trying to extort Hogan to prevent the release of the professional wrestling star’s sex tape.
In 2016, Bove suggested, Davidson was well-versed in the concept of squeezing celebrities like Trump.
“And you’ve done everything you can during these negotiations to get as close to that line as possible without crossing it, right?” Bove asked.
“I made every effort to ensure that my activities were lawful,” Davidson responded.
The prosecution’s star witness, Cohen, has yet to testify — and Trump may never testify at all — but their voices were played out in court in perhaps the most vivid piece of evidence yet.
Prosecutors played a September 2016 recording that Cohen made while informing the then-presidential candidate about a plan to buy McDougal’s silence with a $150,000 payment. McDougal was willing to come forward with her story of an extramarital affair with Trump, a revelation that Trump and his allies were determined to prevent in the final days of the election.
‘What do we have to pay for this? Fifty-one?” Trump can be heard saying at one point.
It is discussed whether payment should be made in cash or by cheque. Then the recording stops.
Although the existence of the recording came to light in the summer of 2018 and had long been known to the public, its disclosure to the jury was a dramatic moment intended to establish that the hush money payment was made with Trump’s knowledge .
He seemed visibly annoyed when the recording was played. Jurors seemed fascinated.
The recording was not the only time Cohen appeared in court in the past week. When he did, it was generally seen in a negative light.
Davidson said his introduction to Cohen occurred in 2011 when Davidson was told to answer an angry phone call from Cohen about a blog post about Daniels and Trump. Davidson said Cohen was described by Daniels’ talent manager as “some jerk” who has “been very, very aggressive and threatened to sue me.”
When Davidson called Cohen and introduced himself, “I was just met with a barrage of insults, innuendo, and accusations. That took a long time.”
Davidson also recounted a memorable phone call with Cohen a month after the 2016 election, in which Trump’s lawyer sounded “depressed and despondent” and complained about being passed over for a role in the new Trump administration.
“He said something like, ‘Jesus Christ.’ Can you (expletive) believe I’m not going to Washington,” Davidson described Cohen as follows. “After everything I did for that (expletive) man. I can’t believe I’m not going to Washington. I saved that guy’s (expletive) so many times, you don’t even know it.’”
The uncharitable characterizations could help Trump’s team in their efforts to undermine Cohen’s credibility. But they can also help prosecutors distance themselves from Cohen, subtly signaling to jurors that he is not a teammate but rather someone who simply has information.
A side issue during the trial is what to do with Trump’s comments outside the court. He has repeatedly defamed witnesses and suggested jury bias – all despite a judge’s order barring him from verbal tirades against key figures in the case.
Trump was fined $9,000 – $1,000 for each of nine separate violations of the gag order found by the judge. Prosecutors later asked for an additional $4,000 fine for what they said were additional violations of the order.
Still, it remains unclear what Judge Juan M. Merchan can do in the event of persistent violations. Merchan raised the possibility of prison time, an unprecedented outcome for a former U.S. president. That would also risk inflaming Trump’s base as he pursues the presidency and further upend the 2024 White House race.
Trump’s lawyers insist he needs some leeway to respond to relentless criticism, including from witnesses, and that his candidacy means he is the subject of nonstop news media coverage.
Merchan didn’t seem convinced, but prison doesn’t seem to be the desired outcome for anyone, at least for now.
“Because each of these statements was made before the Court held defendant in contempt for violating this order on nine previous occasions, and because we prefer to minimize disruptions to these proceedings, we are not yet seeking a prison sentence,” said prosecutor Chris Conroy.
“But,” he added, “the Court’s decision last Tuesday will determine the approach we take to future violations.”